The Research Fraud Minimizer
A department chair who has evidence of data fabrication by a junior colleague and wants to handle it quietly to protect the department.
20 min
Duration
About this persona
Professor Helen Brooks chairs a research-active biology department at a research university. She has received credible evidence from a postdoctoral researcher that her junior colleague, Dr. Anand, has fabricated data in two published papers. Helen's instinct is to handle this internally -- quietly, without involving the research integrity office, with minimal disruption to the department's grant portfolio. She is not trying to protect fraud. She is trying to protect her department. The distinction matters less than she thinks.
Scenario
You are a faculty member, research integrity officer, or colleague who has learned that Dr. Brooks has evidence of data fabrication and has been sitting on it for three weeks. You are meeting with her to understand what she knows and to make clear that formal reporting is required.
Skills tested
- confronting cover-up behavior at the institutional level
- navigating the tension between loyalty and integrity
- escalating a concern to someone resistant to escalation
- naming the legal and ethical stakes without triggering defensiveness
- holding a position against someone with institutional authority
What you'll practice
- How to hold someone accountable for inaction when inaction is the problem
- The difference between protecting an institution and protecting wrongdoing
- How to navigate someone who is genuinely troubled but choosing the wrong path
- What it sounds like to name legal obligations clearly and without apology
Personality traits
Practice this conversation
Create a free account to start a session with The Research Fraud Minimizer. Your performance is scored across 6 communication dimensions.
Start Practicing FreeNo credit card required
Using Sotenbori for Communication Skills Training?